Working Paper No. 221

The Sector Reforms Process inRural Drinking Water and Sanitation:

A Review of the Role of WASMO in Gujarat

Keshab Das

August 2014

Gujarat Institute of Development ResearchGota, Ahmedabad 380 060

Abstracts of all GIDR Working Papers are available on the Institute’swebsite. Working Paper No 121 onwards can be downloaded from the site.

All rights are reserved. This publication may be used with proper citation anddue acknowledgement to the author(s) and the Gujarat Institute of DevelopmentResearch, Ahmedabad.

© Gujarat Institute of Development Research

First Published August 2014ISBN 81-89023-79-9Price Rs. 100.00

Abstract

This paper provides an assessment of the interventions in reforming thedrinking water and sanitation sector in Gujarat as through the Water andSanitation Management Organisation (WASMO) from a supply-driven to ademand-driven intervention. The aspect of community participation has beenlooked into somewhat closely as, inter alia, this has implications for equity,sustainability and democratisation of the scheme. Given the disparatehydrogeological characteristics of the state an attempt has been made toprovide a critique of the institutional arrangement to address the drinkingwater ‘crisis’ in the state. Supplemented by field observations, limitedthough, this paper attempts a critical examination of WASMO’s role as aninstitution for promoting community management of drinking water andsanitation as well as the relevance and inclusiveness of the demand-drivenapproach per se. Concern has been expressed over the quality and reliabilityof official statistics on various aspects of drinking water and sanitation assuch data have become unavailable or not easily available. The conspicuousabsence of independent, systematic and comprehensive assessment of WASMOinterventions, thus, remains a serious roadblock in evaluating the nature andextent of achievement of this heavily-publicised special purpose vehicle inthe sector. Moreover, gross neglect of rural sanitation has continued toremain a splodge on the records of achievement by WASMO. As over adecade has passed since its inception, WASMO as an approach needs to bethought through and evidence assessed rigorously in the interest of thecommunity.

Keywords : Drinking water, WASMO, Institutional arrangement,Sector reforms; Rural Gujarat

JEL Classification : O17; O18; Q25; Q28; and R58

Acknowledgements

Sincere thanks are due to Gani Memon and Arti Oza of GIDR for responsiveresearch assistance. I am grateful to K.C. Tripathi at WASMO for beinghelpful and providing valuable information. Comments on the first draftfrom an anonymous referee and the concerned members at the Forumfor Policy Dialogue on Water Conflicts in India, namely, K. J. Joy,Suhas Paranjpe and Sarita Bhagat were of immense help in revising thepaper. Tara Nair offered some critical inputs. All these mattered in asignificant manner.

i

ii

ContentsPage No

Abstract i

Acknowledgements i

Contents ii

List of Tables iii

List of Figures iii

1. The Context 1

2. Scope and Objectives 2

3. The Lopsided Physiography and Hydrogeology 3

4. Status of Water Availability and Nature of the Crisis 6

5. Approaches to Rural Water Supply 8

5.1 Supply-Driven Approach 8

5.2 Demand-Driven Approach 10

6. Emergence of WASMO: Epitomizing the 12Demand-Driven Approach

7. The Earthquake Rehabilitation and Reconstruction 13(ERR) Project

8. Role of the Implementation Support Agencies (ISAs) 16

9. Role of the Pani Samiti 17

10. Functional Dimensions of WASMO 19

11. Claims and Reality in Rural Drinking Water Coverage 26

12. Water Quality Issues 28

13. Availability of Electricity and Functioning of Taps 29

14. Potential for Water Harvesting 30

15. Sanitation: The Neglected Sector 30

16. Observations from the Field 33

17. Issues in Governance Deficit 39

18. Concluding Observations 40

References 42

List of Tables

1. Groundwater Quality Problems in Gujarat Districts, 2014 7

2. ERR Project: Overall Financial Particulars 15

3. Households by Main Sources of DrinContents 21Rural Gujarat, 2011

4. WASMO’s Staff Composition 23

5. Expenditure Incurred by WASMO under Various 24-25Programmes, 2002-12

6. Rural Households in Gujarat Having No Safe Drinking 27Water Source, by District, 2001 and 2011

7. Status of Rural Habitations with Respect to Drinking 28Water Supply

8. Rural Households in Gujarat Having No Toilets of 32any Type, by District, 2001 and 2011

9. Population and Households of the Surveyed Villages 34

10. Drinking Water Sources for Community Use in the 34Surveyed Villages

11. Implementation of WASMO Schemes 36

12. Working of Pani Samitis 37

13. Management of Water Supply Structures 37

14. Water Supply Provision by WASMO at Village Schools 38

15. Functioning and Monitoring of WASMO Activities/Facilities 39

List of Figures

1 Hydrogeology of Gujarat 5

2 Partnership Profile of WASMO 22

3 Processes and Organisation of the WASMO Intervention 22

4 Formation of Village Water and Sanitation Committees 23(Pani Samitis)

iii

The Sector Reforms Process inRural Drinking Water and Sanitation:

A Review of the Role of WASMO in Gujarat

Keshab Das

1. The Context

The worsening trend in the availability of groundwater and the extent ofdeterioration of quality of potable water in the state of Gujarat has beenamply documented.1 For decades now sustainable supply of drinking anddomestic water has remained a major issue of debate and action amongboth the state and the civil society. Especially in the arid and semi-aridzones of the state, ensuring adequate supply of ‘safe’ potable water on aregular basis has virtually assumed the proportion of a major crisismanagement. In fact, in both the social and political arena water continuesto evoke strong responses, often taking the serious form of ‘water riots’during continual drought years.

The active participation of both the state and parastatal bodiesnotwithstanding, the crisis of water has stayed on. The estimated percapita availability of freshwater in the state was 908 m3 per annum in2010, rendering the state to be identified as a water stressed region. Thepotential of utilisable water resources has been pegged at about 50 bcm(Sen, 2010: 22). The stress has been accentuated further by the fact thatits regional distribution has been extremely uneven; about 70 per cent ofthe resource is found in the southern and central parts of the state. However,in addition to the geohydrological and climatic factors, several newer issuesin water crisis have come up time and again challenging strategies ofmanagement of the resource and its sustainable availability and use. Forexample, overdraw of groundwater for agriculture and industrial use, demandfrom the urban regions, polluting both surface and groundwater, revivingtraditional water harvesting systems or distribution of the Narmada waterthrough expensive pipelines have all concerned both policy makers and thecivil society.

Keshab Das (keshabdas@gmail.com) is Professor at the Gujarat Institute ofDevelopment Research, Ahmedabad.1 For evidence, see, Gupte (2009), Indu and Krishnan (2007), IRMA (2001), and

Chatterjee (2000).

1

Laudably, the state has hardly spared an opportunity to address the watercrisis; it evidently has attached utmost significance to this sector irrespectiveof the hue of the party in power. This is easily surmised by the fact of theoperation of a variety of important state or state-supported institutions/agencies including the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board (GWSSB),Gujarat Jalseva Training Institute (GJTI), Gujarat Water InfrastructureLimited (GWIL), Gujarat Water Resource Development Centre (GWRDC),Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Limited (SSNNL), Water and SanitationManagement Organisation (WASMO), Gujarat Infrastructure DevelopmentBoard (GIDB) and major region-specific projects as sponsored by thecentral government, World Bank, Dutch government and International WaterManagement Institute (IWMI-India). Additionally, with a strong traditionof functioning of the parastatal bodies (non-governmental organisationsand community based organisations, to be specific) in the state,provision, conservation and management of water have formed a vitalshare of activity for many of these agencies. Further, the collectiveand individual efforts of the members of the group called Pravah2 havebeen significant in both the field level intervention and substantivecontribution to policy formulation at the state level and beyond. Importantrole has also been played by a few concerned scholars and the media, bothprint and electronic, to highlight continually various aspects of the watercrisis in the state.

2. Scope and Objectives

This paper provides an assessment of the interventions in reforming thedrinking water and sanitation sector in Gujarat as through WASMO, whichhas been created as a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to carry out the activities.Community participation in the quintessentially demand-driven approachhas been an explicit objective of the programme. This aspect has beenlooked into somewhat closely as, inter alia, this has implications for equity,sustainability and democratisation of the scheme. The paper begins witha discussion on the disparate hydrogeological characteristics of the state,the nature of the drinking water ‘crisis’ in the state and, then, moves on to

2

2 It is a platform working on drinking water issues in Gujarat. It is a unique forumwhere the state’s most active NGOs and individuals working on drinking waterissues engage in debate, research and policy advocacy on drinking water problemsin the state.

explain the essential differences between the existing supply-driven anddemand-driven approaches. This is important to appreciate the gradualintroduction and broad-basing of the demand-based approach (Swajaldharaprogramme) in the state and the coexistence of both the approaches so far.Detailed analyses have been provided regarding the genesis of WASMO, itsearlier form as mainly engaged with the Earthquake Rehabilitation andReconstruction (ERR) project and the subsequent role towards implementingand broad-basing the Swajaldhara programme (and a few other schemes aswell) in all the villages of the state. Supplemented by field observations,limited though, this paper attempts a critical examination of WASMO’srole as an institution for promoting community management of drinkingwater and sanitation as well as the relevance and inclusiveness of the demand-driven approach per se.

3. The Lopsided Physiography and Hydrogeology

Located along the west coast of India, Gujarat has a geographic area of1,96,024 sq.km (5.7 per cent of the Indian territory) and, as per the Censusof India 2011, a population of 60,439,692 (5.0 per cent of the Indianpopulation), and accounts for about 2 per cent of the total fresh waterresources in the country. At the outset it is useful to consider the lopsidedphysiographic, hydrological and climatic dimensions of the state whichwould help appreciate the intensity and locale of the crisis of drinkingwater in the state. While the southwest monsoon during June to Septemberremains the source of rainfall in the state, the variation in rainfall is substantial– it varies between 300 mm in the northwest and about 2000 mm in thesouthernmost part. “The natural limitation of availability for optimumquantity and quality of ground water resources, in space and time, to meetbare minimum requirement of various sector(s) create more conflicts”(Gupte, 2009: 2). The natural disadvantage of skewed distribution of bothsurface and groundwater holds the key to the crisis. Additionally, suchhydrogeologic profile has also mainly contributed to the various problemsconcerning the quality of water, including high salinity and fluoride in certainbelts. Though, that is not to understate the damage caused to both thequality and quantity of water due largely to the rise in water-intensiveagriculture, wastage, overuse and pollution of the resource by the urbanpopulation and certain industries in the state. In fact, the annual groundwaterdraft has risen disturbingly from 5746 mcm per year to 11486 mcm peryear between 1984 and 2004 and further to 12990 mcm per year in 2009.

3

Moreover, the state of groundwater development has gone up to 75 percent as in 2009. Despite the Narmada water being utilised in most partsof north Gujarat, Saurashtra and Kachchh, there exists a “huge gap” betweenthe demand and supply of water given the growing industrial and domesticuse.3

Based upon diverse physiographic features, Gujarat can broadly be dividedinto three distinct regions (Figure 1):

• Mainland Gujarat: This consists of two zones: one, the highland on theeastern border, with heights ranging from 300 to 1090 metres; and two,the coastal alluvial plain on the western side, which, basically, is a deepdepositional plain, fertile and forms one of the richest aquifers of westernIndia.

• Saurashtra: This consists of two zones: one, the highlands of Rajkot andGirnar ranges; and two, the lowlands where central highlands on all sidesare covered by deep alluvia.

• Kachchh: It is enclosed by the Rann of Kachchh on the northern andwestern sides and by the Gulf of Kachchh in the south. The former isa low-lying, flat and highly saline area with grassy patches. Large-scaleingress of saline water occurs here during the north-west monsoon.

4

3 http://cgwb.gov.in/gw_profiles/st_gujarat.html

has both coastal and low level alluvia, but covered in the north by salinemarshy land, known as the Rann. Also, traces of sandstones and lateritesare observed in Surat and Surendranagar districts. Southern Gujarat,particularly Valsad, Navsari and Dangs districts are dominated by theTrappean Basalts.

South and central Gujarat are endowed with all the three large perennialrivers in the state, namely, the Mahi, Narmada and Tapi and smaller onessuch as the Damanganga. Major parts of their catchments are located outsidethe state. These rivers drain into the Gulf of Khambhat. North Gujarat hasvery few rivers and they are seasonal in nature. The most important ofthem are the Sabarmati, Banas, Rupen and Saraswati. They carry streamflows only during three to four months of the monsoon. Whereas theSabarmati drains into the Gulf of Khambhat, the other three drain into theLittle Rann of Kachchh.

Saurashtra has several small and large seasonal rivers constituting 84 riverbasins. The region has radial drainage and the runoff from the rivers isdischarged into the sea. The major rivers are the Shetrunji, Machchhu andBhadar. Kachchh has a large number of rivulets carrying small amount ofannual flows. They all start from the central portion in the hilly ranges thatform watersheds. Some rivers flow towards the sea in the south, some flowtowards the Rann of Kachchh in the north, and others flow towards theLittle Rann of Kachchh in the southeast.

4. Status of Water Availability and Nature of the Crisis

As is indicative through the description of the highly lopsided physiographicfeatures of the state, the crux of the crisis clearly is the declination of thegroundwater tables (already very low, as in some areas of Kachchh,Saurashtra and many parts of north Gujarat) attributable to both an adversehydrogeological condition and the inadequate management of the sources.Based on the hydrogeological endowments and level of groundwaterdevelopment in different parts of the state, the over-development ofgroundwater through extensive installation of tubewells mostly in the districtsof Saurashtra, north and central Gujarat has been noted and fast depletionof groundwater has emerged as a critical problem here. Kachchh, as notedearlier, has widespread saline area making it unsuitable for groundwaterdevelopment. This is also the case in the coastal belt of the Saurashtra

6

region. The groundwater potential in Saurashtra, Kachchh and north Gujarathas been dwindling; particularly, districts such as Gandhinagar, Banaskantha,Sabarkantha and districts of Saurashtra and Kachchh have been experiencingfast decline in the groundwater tables.

Even as detailed talukawise statistics on groundwater development aredifficult to compile, the official website of the Central Ground Water Board(CGWB) indicates that in Gujarat of the 184 talukas 31 are classified as‘Over Exploited’ (Development > 100%), 12 as Critical/Dark (Development90% to 100%) and 69 as Semi Critical/Gray (Development 70 to 90%).Details have been presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Groundwater Quality Problems in Gujarat Districts, 2014

Contaminants Districts Affected in Part

Salinity Ahmedabad, Amreli, Anand, Bharuch, Bhavnagar, Banaskantha,(EC > 3000 Dahod, Porbandar, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh,  Mehsana,µS/cm at 25 ° C) Navsari, Patan, Panchmahals, Rajkot, Sabarkantha,

Surendranagar, Surat and Vadodara (20)

Fluoride Ahmedabad, Amreli, Anand, Banaskantha, Bharuch, Bhavnagar,(>1.5 mg/l) Dahod, Junagadh, Kachchh,  Mehsana, Narmada, Panchmahals,

Patan, Rajkot, Sabarkantha, Surat, Surendranagar andVadodara (18)

Chloride Ahmedabad, Amreli, Bharuch, Bhavnagar, Banaskantha, (> 1000 mg/l) Porbandar, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh,  Dahod,  Patan,

Panchmahals, Sabarkantha, Surendranagar, Surat, Vadodaraand Rajkot (17)

Iron Ahemdabad, Banaskantha, Bhavnagar, Kachchh,  Mehsana(>1.0 mg/l) and Narmada (6)

Nitrate Ahemdabad, Amreli, Anand, Banaskantha, Bharuch, Bhavnagar,(>45 mg/l) Dahod, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh,  Kheda, Mehsana,

Narmada, Navsari, Panchmahals, Patan, Porbandar, Rajkot,Sabarkantha, Surat, Surendranagar and Vadodara (22)

Source: http://cgwb.gov.in/gw_profiles/st_Gujarat.htm (Accessed on June 23, 2014)

In terms of potential status of freshwater availability in major regions ofGujarat, the constraint seems to be on the higher side in Saurashtra andKachchh regions, the water-scarce belts.  Importantly, the per capita wateravailability in Gujarat has steadily declined from 4467 cubic metres in 1961to 1901 cubic metres in 2001 and further to 1568 cubic metres in 2011.The variation in per capita water availability is substantial across major

7

regions of the state.  While in central and south Gujarat it is 1500 cubicmetres, in north Gujarat it is 325 cubic metres, in Saurashtra 510 cubicmetres and in Kachchh 525 cubic metres (Das, 2013: 5-6).

It is important to note that while geohydrological factors could be identifiedas an important constraint in the availability of water in certain parts of thestate, informed studies have attributed the crisis to sheer mismanagementof the sources as neglect of groundwater recharge efforts, rationalising andcontrolling water use by different sectors (especially, those diverting forunbridled commercial uses) and little initiative in rejuvenating (and enhancingtheir capacity through scientific intervention) numerous traditional waterharvesting systems in the state (Kumar et al., 2010; Hirway and Goswami,2008; Hirway et al., 2009; and Das, 2009).4 In fact, it would be reasonableto argue that combinations of climatic, physiographic, geologic and governancefactors have contributed to the crisis of drinking water in the state.

5. Approaches to Rural Water Supply

A look into the different levels at which water resource management iscarried out within the state is useful to appreciate the deficiencies in theapproaches to policy. As drinking water comes under the State List, schemesfor providing it to the rural habitations are being implemented by the stategovernment from its own resources. The central government supplementsthe efforts of the state by providing financial assistance under certaincentrally sponsored schemes.

Two distinct approaches towards ensuring sustainable drinking water supplycan be identified - the supply-driven and demand-driven.

5.1 Supply-Driven Approach

For over half-a-century now, the state has assumed the responsibility ofproviding potable water to the rural population. As has been the practice allthrough, the predominant source of water has been groundwater. The statefollows a given norm (presently, 40 lpcd and at least one public safe source

8

4 For instance, Kumar et al. (2010: 12) observe that “groundwater resources in thewater-scarce arid and semi-arid regions of Gujarat are already “over-exploited” orare on the verge of it. Further exploitation of groundwater for expanding irrigationis not possible in any of these regions”.

for a population of 250) and arranges for providing water. This, however,involves the massive paraphernalia of organisational arrangements whereinter-departmental coordination holds the key to successful functioning.Nevertheless, the structure is complicated, the roles overlap, and earnestefforts are essential to ensure an institutionalised manner of addressingthis issue.

The state government implements the Rural Water Supply Programmeunder the state sector Minimum Needs Programme (MNP). The centralgovernment, through the Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission(RGNDWM) supplements the efforts of the state by providing financialassistance under the Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP)and the Drinking Water Supply component of the Prime Minister’sGramodayaYojana (PMGY).

The programme to distribute drinking water to the rural areas is beingimplemented in the state since 1961. It consists of the following:

• Regional Water Supply Schemes

• Individual Village Water Supply Schemes

• Installation of handpumps

• Digging of simple wells

In reality, this supply-driven approach has led to a certain kind ofdysfunctionality affecting sustainable water supply, which was observedwith groundwater as the vital source. Efforts at harvesting both rainwaterand surface run-off have been grossly neglected. A critical aspect of thewater supply scenario in Gujarat is both the existence and emergence ofdefunct sources. A growing number of sources becoming or continuing tobe defunct is a matter of concern as it involves issues of management,possibilities for rejuvenation and a thorough re-evaluation of water supplyschemes in the state. Several enquiries have been made why these sourcesfall into disuse and the type of remedial measures that can be taken toreactivate them. This point to several possibilities for augmenting drinkingwater supply despite geohydrological constraints.

It is obvious that the most appropriate answers to the issue of rejuvenationof defunct sources could be provided by the concerned departmental

9

personnel through detailed techno-economic evaluation. Whereas, in casesof permanent fall of water level there could be a need to set up newsources of water, just simple repairs to correct minor mechanical or electricalfaults could help rejuvenate many sources that have become defunct. Asone study estimated (Das and Kumar, 1999), for the rejuvenation of threefourths of all the defunct sources in nine districts (including Kachchh andSaurashtra) the average expenditure would range between Rs. 1,000 and Rs.5,000. It is important to note that the remaining quarter of defunct sourcescould be made functional with an average expenditure of less than Rs.1,000, a majority of them requiring less than Rs. 500 for a revamp. Aconsiderable proportion of defunct sources in the districts of Saurashtra canbe revived by spending small amounts on the repairs. Among defunct sourceshandpumps were predominant. These were also the major sources of watersupply in the districts.

In a typical supply-driven approach popular involvement in managing publicwater sources is often found relegated to the background. As reported bynumerous studies, the lack of participation has been noticed mostly inplanning, site selection, maintenance and operation. Moreover, the absenceof active participation of women in such matters is a pervasive problem inthe state.

5.2 Demand-Driven Approach

As has often been noted, villagers have serious complaints about governmentagencies not attending to sources for long period and also not taking actionduring acute need. There have been occasions when the priorities for sourcesto be maintained have been vitiated due to political interference. This hasresulted in non-attendance of sources requiring immediate attention. Besides,villagers in many cases, have not reported problems to the concerneddepartment, either because they do not know whom to contact or do nothope for any positive outcome of their request. Especially, in the case ofhandpumps no caretaker can be identified to bear the responsibility ofinforming the concerned departmental agencies whenever required. Thenon-availability of spare parts or expertise locally has also been describedas a cause for the delay in the maintenance of the sources.

At a certain level of praxis, much could be described as poor managementand upkeep of the sources as also careful use of the otherwise scarce

10

resource. Considering the frequent incidence of these problems, a substantivechange in approach was called for. Largely influenced by the imperatives ofa liberalizing economy and also experiences from a host of similar countries,assigning a larger role to the local community in managing water supply hascome to be emphasized. Hailed as a ‘paradigm shift’, from a grossly supply-driven to an essentially demand-driven approach, the nationwide launchingof the Sector Reform Programme (SRP) in 1999, marked the beginning ofa strategy that no longer considered potable water to be a free good (implyingthat its provision would have to be the responsibility of the government).In principle, the SRP aimed at improving the sustainability of water supplysystems and sources, besides ensuring effective implementation of schemes.

The SRP was introduced with a view to institutionalizing a) communityparticipation and b) the demand-driven strategy. The cardinal principles ofimplementation were awareness creation, popular participation, functionaltransparency, and stakeholder accountability. The reform process had beenimplemented through the SRP on a pilot basis in 63 districts in India. InGujarat, the selected pilot districts were Mehsana, Surat and Rajkot. Apartfrom the time over-run, some of the key aspects of this programme hadnot fared well in the state. Two specific components may be noted. One,very poor efforts were made at awareness generation in the concerned villages.Two, the mandatory popular contribution that would ensure directinvolvement of the villager (the most important stakeholder of SRP), hadoften come from influential individuals or organizations largely treating the10 per cent (of the estimated cost of the project for a given village)contribution as a mere financial/administrative requirement.

Insights from concurrent monitoring of the SRP (Das, 2004)5 in the statesuggest that:

• Baseline survey and PRAs were undertaken in a haphazard mannerwith no adherence to the guidelines on representative sampling, scaleof sample.

• Women’s participation in the gram sabhas and Village Water andSanitation Committees (VWSCs) was limited despite their namesmentioned in the list of committee members.

• IEC activities in many villages were inadequate.

11

5 As summarised in PRAVAH (2005: 10-11).

• Collection of contribution from households was irregularly conductedand in many cases money came from just a few ‘wealthy’ people inthe village, often the sarpanch or private trusts.

• Bank accounts had not been opened for many villages to create theO & M fund.

• Many NGOs lacked the technical expertise to design appropriatewater systems.

• Frequent changes of government officers dissuaded rapport with localcommunities.

• Delays were also reported because of conflicts between privatecontractors and local committees in terms of determining rates forboth supplies and operations.

• A more focused and sustained capacity building of local leaders andcommunity water managers was necessary.

• None of the SRP schemes included sanitation.

Notwithstanding the performance of the SRP in the pilot districts, theSwajaldhara programme came to be implemented in all the districts of thestate; this programme was a broad-based form of the SRP.

6. Emergence of WASMO: Epitomizing the Demand-Driven Approach

For over half-a-century, the single dominant practice of state playing thekey role in rural water supply had often been found wanting as it hadresulted in inadequate, irregular and unreliable provisioning of the resource.The so-called supply-driven approach also was affected by the typical absenceof proper coordination between various concerned government departments.Also, the widespread phenomenon of decades of non-payment of watertariffs, despite being nominal in value, by rural households remained adifficult aspect in the supply-driven approach. While so little could be doneto mend the institutional dysfunctionalities and control the tempo ofoverexploitation of groundwater, by 1999, with almost a decade of economicreforms in operation in India, the water and sanitation sector came underthe purview of reforms. The basic aim of the sectoral reforms was to

12

promote the demand-driven approach emphasizing decentralized communityparticipation, efficiency and transparency in management at the village level.

With the financial support of the Royal Netherlands Embassy, in 1997, theGovernment of Gujarat (GoG) had started the Ghogha Rural DrinkingWater Supply Project which was the first such initiative in pursuing a demand-driven approach. It targeted 82 villages in the talukas of Bhavnagar, Talajaand Ghogha in the Bhavnagar district. To achieve sustainability in ruralwater supply and sanitation, it emphasized the need for decentralisation andcommunity involvement in all stages of conception, operation andmaintenance. As indicated earlier, by 1999, the SRP had been launched inthree districts of Gujarat and like the so-called demand-driven approach,the SRP had claimed to have brought decentralized water supply tovillages with community participation. The WASMO, interestingly, wascreated as an SPV of the GoG in 2002 mainly in response to carryingforward the Ghogha Project.

Hailed as a paradigm shift, even before it had taken roots, the demand-driven approach in the water and sanitation sector was touted as the keyreform that was based upon the premise of community ownership andresponsibility in managing both the facilities and finance. Through theperusal of tenets such as community management and decentralized localgovernance, the efforts included creation of in-village water supply systemsand sanitation facilities. With this experience, WASMO’s initiation into theEarthquake Rehabilitation and Reconstruction (ERR) Project was rathersmooth and in many ways the pattern of implementation of the ERRproject was akin to that of the prototype – the Ghogha project.

7. The Earthquake Rehabilitation and Reconstruction (ERR)Project

As noted earlier, the northwest part of Gujarat has been a chronically waterscarce region. Unfortunately, on January 26, 2001, this part of the statewas devastated by a stern earthquake of the magnitude 6.9 on the Richterscale. Nearly 1334 villages were heavily destructed or almost destroyedand, expectedly, it caused considerable damage to the major water distributionpipelines and other water supply systems including in-village pipelines,traditional water sources and so on. It called for a substantial reconstruction

13

14

of the overall systems in these earthquake-affected areas so as to ensuresustainable supply of drinking water and provisioning of sanitation facilities.

Following careful stocktaking of the damages caused to the water sourcesas well as supply systems by the earthquake and undertaking detailedplanning, the WASMO launched the ERR project in April 2003 and, finally,proposed to cover 1255 earthquake affected villages to restore and developwater supply and sanitation facilities in the districts of Kachchh,Surendranagar and Jamnagar and Santalpur block in Patan, leaving villagesof Rajkot district which had been covered under the SRP pilot project ofthe Government of India. The ERR programme had been implemented in875 villages of 9 blocks of Kachchh district, 103 villages of Santalpurblock of Patan district, 136 villages of 7 blocks of Surendranagar districtand 146 villages of 10 blocks of Jamnagar district.

The major objectives of the ERR project were as follows:

• To establish decentralized, demand-driven, community owned ruralwater supply and sanitation systems which would be planned, approvedimplemented, operated and managed by the rural populace;

• To ensure drinking water safety through an integrated grouping ofpipelines, local traditional sources and multiple sources for alternativeuse;

• To build effective community institutions at the local level bysupporting capacity building and empowerment;

• To ensure that all community groups, including women, are able toplay a part in the decision making process and benefit from theprogramme;

• To improve the living environment of households and communitythrough setting up of sanitation facilities and promoting hygieneawareness in the local population; and

• To provide implementation support to communities throughindependent civil society organizations who would function asImplementation Support Agencies (ISAs).

The initial fiscal provision for the project has been shown in Table 1.Whereas the initial contribution and involvement by the Royal Netherlands

15

Embassy was substantial, they withdrew fully, subsequently. Since April2004, the project came to be funded entirely by Indian sources, especially,both the state and central governments.

Table 2: ERR Project: Overall Financial Particulars

Details Amount (Rs. Lakh)

Total project provision 17,226.78

Contribution

Royal Netherlands Embassy 14,880.00

Government of Gujarat 1,620.00

Community 485.00

Salvage value of existing water supply systems 243.00

The overall implementation of the programme at the village level followeda two-stage approach, the total time period being 18 months. Whereas thefirst phase contributed to imparting learning and building confidenceconcerning decentralized governance and community ownership, the secondphase focused upon scaling up structural activities. Accordingly, the firstprogramme cycle covered the initial six month period and works oncommunity mobilization with the use of information, education andcommunication (IEC) materials, formation of Pani Samitis to directly involvevillagers in the responsive decision-making process. During the secondcycle, which extended for a year, the hardware aspect of the project receivedpriority. Activities included preparing and finalizing detailed proposals withapproximate costs for village action plans (VAPs) and household contributionsand also execution of structural work for required water and sanitationfacilities along with water resource management work wherever applicable.The whole process mainly involved the following:

• Formation of the Pani Samiti

• Opening of the bank account

• Preparation of the VAP

• Finalization of the VAP

• Disbursement of funds

• Start of construction/structural work

• Completion of the physical structure

• Fixation of water and sanitation tariff

16

The programme envisaged a period of five years commencing fromOctober 01, 2002. Hence, by September 30, 2007 all works werepurported to be completed with the financial closure by March 31, 2008.The programme was scheduled to be implemented in two phases. ThePhase I was to be the “Learning Period”, for which it proposed theimplementation to be restricted to 200 villages. The Phase II implementationwas proposed to proceed on the basis of Phase I implementation experienceafter 18 months. For the implementation of this project, WASMOhad established three Coordination, Monitoring and Support Units (CMSUs)at the district level who in the field were supported by EngineeringSupport Cells (ESCs) and ISAs. The latter was to interact directly withPani Samitis that had been created in each village as a sub-committee ofthe panchayat.

8. Role of the Implementation Support Agencies (ISAs)

An important feature of the ERR was the crucial role assigned to ISAs whowould engage in the mobilization of community to participate effectivelyin the programme in a sustainable manner. ISAs were not only to play theirroles in initiating, coordinating and organizing activities at the village level,but also to act as conduits between WASMO and the local population. Theproject envisaged that four to nine NGOs could be selected to work for theproject period.

The ISAs were chosen by WASMO to ensure that they had adequateexperience and potential to take part in this programme in a proactivemanner. There were only a few ISAs which did not have previous workexperience in a given aspect of the programme. However, many of theISAs had enough earlier experience working in the programme locations.Hence, ISAs were sought to be chosen keeping in view that these had priorexperience in working in or at least had some understanding of the waterand sanitation sector, and had a demonstrated performance andaccountability record, in addition to the presence in the area.

In order to implement various components and activities of the ERR project,ISAs were expected to play an important role in the execution of suchactivities as to develop local institutions like Pani Samitis and fortify existinginstitutions like gram panchayats. As per the project guidelines, ISAs were

17

given a set of responsibilities in the context of the programme. These wereas follows:

• Community mobilization by awareness generation and soliciting theirparticipation;

• Institution-building by forming effective Pani Samitis in accordancewith the guidelines;

• Sanitation and hygiene promotion through awareness campaigns thatespecially involved women and children and facilitated the constructionof sanitation facilities;

• Ensuring equality in and across the village protecting the interest ofweaker sections;

• Managing water resource by facilitating plan preparation in consultationwith the community;

• Facilitating operation and maintenance of the systems created byimparting training; and

• Ensuring transparent and appropriate account keeping by Pani Samitisthrough imparting training and being part of the audit process.

A total of 31 ISAs had partnered with WASMO in the programmeand 1255 villages were assigned to them to facilitate and support theimplementation of the project, within a stipulated phasewise time schedule.

9. Role of the Pani Samiti

In this programme, the Pani Samiti had been perceived as the village levelservice institution that was responsible for the management of in-villagewater supply and sanitation facilities. Pani Samitis were to occupy a statusof a functional committee of the gram panchayats. Major responsibilitiesof the Pani Samiti were to:

• Carry out the construction of water supply and water harvestingstructures;

• Purchase construction materials;

• Monitor and ensure quality of works;

• Ensure that water was being supplied as per norms;

• Collect regular operation and maintenance contribution;

• Guarantee transparency in fund collection and utilization;

• Ensure optimal use of water;

• Insist upon maintenance of environmental cleanliness, and

• Ensure that water supply and sanitation structures were kept cleanand functional.

As detailed earlier, it is interesting to note that while the Ghogha projectwas underway since 1997, the SRP was introduced (through three pilotdistricts) in Gujarat in 1999. The transformation of the Ghogha project into the ERR with the very similar features was, eventually, to perpetuate thedemand-driven approach. The SRP was broad-based into the Swajaldharain December 2002. As is known, the Swajaldhara programme had twostreams. The first, Swajaldhara - I, is directed at gram panchayats, groupsof gram panchayats and intermediate panchayats at block or taluka level.Swajaldhara - II is directed at districts.

At present 13 Gujarat districts are part of the national Swajaldharaprogramme, while 11 others are covered under the SRP. Kachchh district isexclusively covered by the ERR Project. The approach, guiding principlesand institutional aspects of all these programmes are very similar. Theinstitutional framework comprises the National Swajaldhara MonitoringCommittee (NSMC), which is the national level monitoring agency. At thestate level, WASMO is the State Water and Sanitation Mission (SWSM)for Gujarat. WASMO coordinates the activities of the District Waterand Sanitation Committees (DWSCs) and the Village Water and SanitationCommittees (VWSCs) or Pani Samitis. This arrangement ensuredthat WASMO was there to stay for long and its de facto status hadbeen transformed from the original SPV to an entrenched and powerfulagency for the demand-driven approach to drinking water and sanitationin the state.

18

19

10. Functional Dimensions of WASMO

As WASMO, steadily and summarily, deepened the demand-driven approachin water supply and sanitation in Gujarat, agencies such as the GWSSB,GJTI and GWIL dove-tailed their functioning and approach to contributeto WASMO’s rise as a centralising agency. This is despite the fact that boththe GJTI and GWSSB had been engaged for long within the supply-drivenframework, attended to discrete needs of geohydrologically determinedregions and also had undertaken the initial initiatives in introducing the SRPor, Swajaldhara, as it was known subsequently.

Even as the geohydrological lopsidedness has often been cited as amajor barrier to broad-basing water access in most parts (exceptingmuch of the south) of the state the issue of managing water as betweencompeting uses continues to be the crux of the problem. This has impliedthat a mere over-emphasis on decentralisation of the local drinking waterdistribution would fail to address the water management question. Forinstance, the low rainfall in north Gujarat notwithstanding, the alluvial soiland topographic conditions favour groundwater recharge and rejuvenatingaquifers. These have resulted in sustaining huge groundwater reservoirsover the last few decades during when thousands of tubewells have beendug in the region.

However, with the mindless mining of groundwater for both agriculture andindustrial consumption, the role of WASMO seems to have been stymiedconsiderably. As reported by the United Nations World Water DevelopmentReport 2014 unsustainable use of water for agriculture is the prime reasonfor the groundwater level falling in most parts of Gujarat. “In Gujarat, oneof the drier states in India, policies to ration farm power supply, and thuswater supply, have been recommended to encourage farmers to use watermore sparingly” (UNWWAP, 2014: 110). The problematic policy of thestate government to provide subsidised power primarily for irrigation hascaused depletion of groundwater in most un-irrigated areas, leading to asevere drinking water crisis. A 2012 report of the CGWB observed thatmore than half of the borewells in Gujarat had recorded a decline in thewater level. It held that “Out of this, 28% wells have shown a fall in 0-2mrange. About 12% of the wells have shown fall in 2-4m range and about

20

18% wells have shown fall in water level in more than 4m”.6 What isworrying is that these approaches to extract as much groundwater in thename of promoting agriculture has hardly been contested as a major causefor the drinking water crisis in the state.

The WASMO’s institutional approach of a systematic partnership building(Figure 2) with the local community and all possible stakeholders and stepstowards ‘empowering’ the local water users (Figure 3) appear impressive.However, if such organisational framework has failed to intervene effectivelyin stopping excessive groundwater exploitation and polluting of groundwaterby several industrial units in both south Gujarat and Saurashtra districts thenone wonders if such information serves any social purpose. For example,how does one deal with the data on near-total coverage of villages throughPani Samitis (Figure 4) existing side-by-side with the fact of overdrawal ofgroundwater and contamination of water sources. How does one address theissue that while the south Gujarat region has been richly endowed with waterresources, both ground and surface, industrial effluents have systematicallypolluted the water resources in several parts of the region. This has led toa despicable situation where indiscriminate and poorly regulated waterpollution by the industry has ruined the drinking water sources. Similarly, thecoastal region of Saurashtra has been subjected to overdrawing groundwaterallowing salinity ingress to have grown over the years.

The simple question is that can the demand-driven approach (as WASMOhas propagated so vehemently) be insensitive to the availability, conservationand quality of drinking water. What does decentralised management addup to if it has been unable to respond to the serious issue of falling accessto drinking water due to exploitation and mismanagement of the sources.

Interestingly, while the extraordinary governance and decentralised approachof WASMO are hailed as having succeeded in making nearly all ruralhouseholds access safe drinking water, the actuality differs considerably.Table 3 makes it amply clear that of the total rural households just about46 per cent (if one considers the three relatively safe sources, namely, tapwater from treated source, handpumps and tubewells/borewells) have beencovered by somewhat dependable sources while a sizeable populationconsumes unsafe water. It is important to cross-check the information

6 http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/gujarat-one-of-the-most-water-starved-states-in-india-un-report/article1-1205787.aspx

21

provided by the Census of India 2011 with that provided by WASMO. Forinstance, while the proportion of rural households with tap connectivity in2011 is recorded as a mere 16.7 per cent by the Census, WASMO puts thefigure at 72.2 per cent for the same year and 77.8 per cent by August 2013.Reliability of data on access to safe drinking water by rural households inthe state is an exceptionally serious issue and requires vigilance and caution.

Table 3: Households by Main Sources of Drinking Wat er in Rural Gujarat, 2011

Particulars Number of Households Proportion (%)

Total Rural Households 67,65,403 100.0

Sources of Drinking Water

Tap water from treated source 11,28,286 16.7

Tap water from un-treated source 26,45,096 39.1

Covered well 2,53,535 3.7

Un-covered well 5,65,425 8.4

Hand pump 12,33,167 18.2

Tubewell/Borewell 7,35,908 10.9

Spring 9,795 0.1

River/Canal 36,811 0.5

Tank/Pond/Lake 24,401 0.4

Other sources 1,32,979 2.0

Source: Census of India 2011, as reproduced in Government of Gujarat (2013), Socio-economic Review 2012-13, Gujarat State, Directorate of Economics and Statistics,Gandhinagar, p. S-92.

Further, through a pointed reference to WASMO lagging behind in undertakingwork under the Swajaldhara/SRP it has been observed that while during2011-12 of the 1500 schemes only 1057 (70.5 %) could be completed,during 2012-13 of the 1200 schemes only 605 (50.4 %) could be concludedup to December 2012 (Government of Gujarat, 2013: 60). These schemesinclude tribal areas as well. If even by the 2012-13 several schemes wereyet to be completed, the point to ponder remains the veracity of the variousclaims of near-complete coverage of rural households through WASMOintervention.7 The staff composition (Table 4) with over 80 per cent of the

7 http://indianexponent.com/the-ugyly-truth-behind-the-much-touted-power-irrigation-infrastructure-of-gujarat/

22

personnel accounting for ‘technical’ and ‘social mobilisers’ though appearsimpressive does not justify the existence of large number of rural householdsnot having access to safe potable water.

Figure 2: Partnership Profile of WASMO

Source: WASMO, Gandhinagar.

Figure 3: Processes and Organisation of the WASMO Intervention

Source: WASMO, Gandhinagar.

23

Figure 4: Formation of Village Water and Sanitation Committees (Pani Samitis)

Source: WASMO, Gandhinagar.

Table 4: WASMO’s Staff Composition

Details Percentage

Technical Staff 38.18

Social Mobilizes 42.55

Communication Staff 3.64

Finance Staff 11.64

Administration staff 4.00

Total 100.00

Notwithstanding the notable variance in data on coverage as projectedby WASMO and alternate sources, the expenditure across severalprogrammes by WASMO has grown significantly (Table 5). Despite beinga state sponsored SPV, over 70 per cent of all funds available to WASMOcomes from the Government of India funded programmes, the prominentamong them are, eventually, Swajaldhara (50.0%) and ERR (21.1%).Similarly, SRS (accounting for 89.5% of the funds available through theGovernment of Gujarat) has been the dominant programme under the stategovernment.

24

Tab

le 5

: E

xpen

ditu

re I

ncu

rred

by

WA

SMO

un

der

Var

iou

s P

rogr

amm

es,

2002

-12

(Rs.

Lak

h)

cont

d...

25

Sour

ce:

WA

SMO

, G

andh

inag

ar.

Not

es:

GoI

– G

over

nmen

t of

Ind

ia;

GoG

– G

over

nmen

t of

Guj

arat

; I

TD

P –

Int

egra

ted

Tri

bal

Dev

elop

men

t P

rogr

amm

e;

AR

WSP

– A

ccel

erat

ed R

ural

Wat

er S

uppl

y P

rogr

amm

e; W

Q –

Wat

er Q

ualit

y M

onit

orin

g; W

SSO

– W

ater

San

itat

ion

Supp

ort O

rgan

isat

ion;

CC

DU

- C

omm

unic

atio

n an

d C

apac

ity

Dev

elop

men

t U

nit;

R

O –

Rev

erse

Osm

osis

Pla

nt:

RR

WH

S -

Roo

f R

ain

Wat

er H

arve

stin

gSt

ruct

ures

; F

C –

Fin

ance

Com

mis

sion

; S

OW

- S

ourc

e of

Wat

er ;

SR

S –

Sect

or R

efor

m S

chem

e;

H2H

– H

omel

ess

to H

ome;

R &

D –

Res

earc

h an

d D

evel

opm

ent.

* In

Nar

mad

a, V

alsa

d, D

ang

and

Dah

od.

26

11. Claims and Reality in Rural Drinking Water Coverage

The predominance of WASMO as a successful8 organisation in effectingthe demand-driven drinking water and sanitation programmes in rural Gujarathas been kept afloat through a strong and inimitable strategy of projectingits positive image consistently. In fact, the repeated promotion of theorganisation as devoted to their catchphrase ‘Users are the best managers’and proclamation of an almost complete achievement in coverage andimplementation have to be understood within the context of an absence ofevaluation exercises by independent agencies. Whether there exists aconscious strategy by WASMO to obfuscate any such objective evaluationneeds to be established.

Such an observation questioning the reliability of the WASMO data cropsup due to a particularly disturbing development. In the absence of anyobjective and regular assessment of the progress by a competent ‘thirdparty’ the data from the Census of India for the two time points of 2001 and2011 provide an insight into the ground reality of rural drinking water andsanitation in Gujarat. Even as Census operations are not primarily aimedat drinking water and sanitation statistics, the results obtained can be treatedwith high degree of reliability. Table 6 classifies districts in terms ofproportion of rural households not having a single safe source for drinkingwater, which includes taps, handpumps and borewells. It is revealing thatthe status of access to safe drinking water was far better in 2001 as comparedto the same a decade later in 2011. The proportion of rural householdshaving no safe drinking water source was 23 per cent in 2001 and it hadshot up about three times to about 67 per cent in 2011. Further, while in2001 excepting one district (Porbandar with 53 per cent) no district hadmore than 50 per cent of households without access to a safe source ofdrinking water, in 2011, 16 districts had over half of their rural householdswith access to any type of safe source. Interestingly, these districts includePorbandar, Patan, Ahmedabad, Surendranagar, Rajkot, Kachchh, Jamnagar,Amreli, Bhavnagar, Mehsana and Gandhinagar all of which are shown inthe WASMO database to be practically free of such an inadequacy. As anaside, even the data provided by the central government’s Ministry ofDrinking Water and Sanitation indicate these and several other districts ofGujarat hardly have any safe drinking water issue as most rural habitationshave been categorised as ‘Fully Covered’ (Table 7). It may be noted thatthe Ministry’s data are based upon what the concerned agencies (GWSSBand WASMO) of the state government provide.8 Going by the fact that it has been the recipient of three national and international

awards as often highlighted in the agency’s publicity materials.

27

Table 6: Rural Households in Gujarat Having No Safe Drinking Water Source, by District, 2001 and 2011

Proportion Districts (% of Rural Households having No safe drinking water source)

2001 2011

>70 % - Porbandar (71.92); Patan (71.45);Junagadh (70.23)

3 districts

50-70 % Porbandar (52.92) Ahmedabad (68.86);1 district Surendranagar (68.14); Rajkot

(66.93); Kachchh (65.52);Jamnagar (63.32); Amreli

(62.85); Sabarkantha (60.40);Bhavnagar (57.96); Anand (57.00);Mehsana (54.68); Banaskantha(54.46); Gandhinagar (53.61);

Bharuch (53.10)13 districts

<50% Dahod (44.48); Kheda (49.67); Dahod (48.92);Surendranagar (41.22); Panchmahals (44.84); DangsPanchmahals (41.02); (44.77); Navsari (41.85); Vadodara

Dangs (40.56); Bhavnagar (41.35); Surat (37.34); Valsad(37.11); Valsad (31.76); (31.00); Narmada (26.96); TapiJamnagar (30.08); Navsari (21.94)(28.20); Junagadh (26.53); 10 districtsRajkot (23.84); Katch (22.64);Amreli (22.27); Ahmedabad(21.70); Surat (21.20); Kheda(18.57); Sabarkhantha (18.38);

Banaskantha (16.83); Bharuch(16.68); Anand (16.00); Patan(12.69); Vadodara (12.62);Narmada (11.66); Mahesana

(6.89); Gandhinagar (3.77)24 districts

Gujarat 23.13 66.96(All households)

Source: Census of India, 2001 and 2011

28

Table 7: Status of Rural Habitations with Respect to Drinking Water Supply(As on April 01, 2013)

District Number of Habitations

Total Fully Partially QualityCovered Covered Affected

Ahmedabad 703 701 2 0

Amreli 646 643 3 0

Anand 909 896 3 10

Banaskantha 1730 1586 6 138

Bharuch 787 783 0 4

Bhavnagar 795 795 0 0

Dangs 326 310 16 0

Dahod 3144 3144 0 0

Gandhinagar 412 405 7 0

Jamnagar 748 748 0 0

Junagadh 900 870 25 5

Kachchh 1070 1070 0 0

Kheda 2052 2048 3 1

Mehsana 830 830 0 0

Narmada 720 597 108 15

Navsari 2035 1846 188 1

Panchmahals 2526 2526 0 0

Patan 649 649 0 0

Porbandar 182 182 0 0

Rajkot 861 861 0 0

Sabarkantha 2444 2429 3 12

Surat 1543 1517 26 0

Surendranagar 696 696 0 0

Tapi 1663 1657 6 0

Vadodara 2149 2122 6 21

Valsad 3895 3894 1 0

Total 34415 33805 403 207

Source: http://indiawater.gov.in/imisreports/Reports/Physical/rpt_RWS_Coverage OfHabitationNew_D.aspx?Rep=0

12. Water Quality Issues

Other than the scarcity of groundwater resource, the quality of the availablewater is also an important aspect for consideration. As is well known, theproblem of excess fluoride and nitrate is particularly acute in the whole of

29

Saurashtra and Kachchh districts; particularly, in the Amreli district, thereare many villages with high level of groundwater fluoride content. Parts ofSabarkantha, Rajkot, Junagadh and Kheda are also affected by suchdeterioration in water quality due to excess nitrate. In most parts, the TDScontent has been found to be much higher than the permissible limits. Theentire coastal belt, stretching from the north western point of Kachchhthrough Saurashtra districts to the southern part of Kheda has been affectedby saline ingress rendering the groundwater unsuitable for drinking. Asreported in Das (2005), respondents in villages in Amreli, Jamnagar andSurendranagar complained of ailments such as body ache, joint pain andkidney stones reflecting high fluoride and TDS in water being used fordomestic purposes. It is also well known that the groundwater in Liliyataluka of Amreli contains excessive fluoride to the tune of 11 ppm, whichis far higher than is permissible. Similarly, in Thala village of Dhangadhrataluka in Surendranagar, the groundwater contains fluoride of the order of1.5 ppm which is higher than the permissible limit. Two of the samplevillages, Sachana in Jamnagar taluka of the district Jamnagar and Lawachain Olpad taluka of Surat, were located on the seashore and had excessivesalinity in the groundwater, rendering the water from the handpumpsunpotable.

Groundwater contamination being an important problem, the official listprovides names of only those villages which would have sent water samplesfor testing to the laboratory at the apex body, the GJTI at Gandhinagar.Such information is clearly inadequate. Data on the names of individualvillages affected by water quality problem or (even) taluka level number ofvillages with water quality problem are almost impossible to obtain, thestated explicit reason being that such information has been kept confidential.From a policy perspective, it is crucial that such important information bemade available to the public. Secrecy and reluctance to share this data, tosay the least, will certainly be against the interest of the development ofthe state.

13. Availability of Electricity and Functioning of Taps

At the village level the nature and timing of the supply of power are highlyerratic directly affecting the household availability and access to drinkingwater. The problem of power supply is so intricately linked to the issue ofwater availability that the crisis of water scarcity has to be seen partly as

30

a product of the low or no voltage power position that often makes itimpossible for water pumps to work on all the seven days of a week. Theother interesting feature is the widely prevalent illegality of household powerconnections that implies a free-rider situation where no charges are beingpaid by those who use the facility. It is important to address this problemwith reference to sustainability of water supply in rural areas. That thegram panchayats are not supposed to pay electricity charges and powertheft by individual households is common should not be acting against theiraccess to adequate and regular supply of water.

14. Potential for Water Harvesting

In all societies, systems of conserving water for dry seasons, in particular,have been found. However, with excessive emphasis on and developmentof modern piped water supply, the disinclination towards harvesting bothrainwater and surface run-off, even in rural societies, has been quite apparent.Nevertheless, with the growing crisis of availability of freshwater and thefalling groundwater tables, attention is being reverted to appreciating thepotential of revival of traditional water harvesting systems in rural areas.As may be surmised from a detailed study in Gujarat villages (Das 2009),the two most important reasons for neglect cited are that traditional sourceshad dried up (or no longer able to meet the local demand) and the other(mainly, piped systems) sources provided larger quantities at practically nocost. Interestingly, there was relatively high level of awareness regarding thebenefits of both the traditional and modern rainwater harvesting systems inall the sample villages. The major constraint in adopting/ reviving harvestingsystems was reported to be poor affordability. As regards measures to revivesources, the most frequently reported suggestion was to desilt the talavs andwells. These observations are, intrinsically, cautionary. The essentiality ofreviving/ modernizing traditional sources cannot be overstated for asustainable water future and it is wise to recognize that overdrawal ofgroundwater (despite the convenience of the piped system) can potentiallybe a fragile approach to addressing the crisis of drinking water in the state.

15. Sanitation: The Neglected Sector

Gujarat’s record in the sphere of sanitation, particularly in rural areas, hasbeen remarkably poor. Sanitation facilities must be made mandatory in allschools for a better and stronger spread of the awareness about hygienic

31

practices and reduction of diseases such as diarrhoea. While householdtoilets are to be largely encouraged, community sanitation facilities need tobe professionally managed and these are best suited to public utility spaces.In awareness generation campaigns for ICT purposes, visual demonstration(emphasizing television) can be effectively used. The rural areas are in noshape even for ensuring household connectivity to drainage outlet, animportant provision to maintain a hygienic environment.

Considering the rural sanitation data as obtained from the Census of India,it is obvious that in 2011 while in 19 districts 50 to 75 per cent ofrural households did not have access to any form of toilets, six districts hadover 75 per cent of their rural households without any form of toilets(Table 8). The overall coverage figure for rural Gujarat between the twoCensuses has risen from about 22 per cent to 33 per cent, far from thealmost complete coverage impression as might be surmised from WASMO’spublicity materials. These figures belie the systematically persuasiveassertion of achievement in the rural sanitation sphere through initiativesby WASMO.

32

Table 8: Rural Households in Gujarat Having No Toilets of any Type, by District, 2001 and 2011

Proportion Districts (% of Rural Households having No Toilets)

2001 2011

>75 % Dahod (93.64); Dangs (90.97); Dahod (93.85); NarmadaPanchmahals (90.54); (83.96); Panchmahals (82.99);Narmada (88.39); Banaskantha Banaskantha (82.85);(87.64); Porbandar (85.00); Surendranagar (79.17);Surendranagar (84.81); Valsad Tapi (77.02)(83.73); Bhavnagar (83.13); 6 districtsJamnagar (81.01); Kheda (80.06);Patan (79.54); Ahmedabad(77.87); Sabarkantha (77.66);Navsari (77.16); Rajkot (77.00);Vadodara (76.61)17 districts

50-75 % Surat (74.75); Kachchh (72.78); Dangs (74.74); KhedaJunagadh (72.62); Mahesana (74.60); Valsad (72.42);(70.81); Amreli (69.61); Vadodara (71.46);Gandhinagar (69.17); Sabarkantha (68.92);Anand (68.56); Bharuch (62.57) Bhavnagar (67.89);8 districts Ahmedabad (67.13);

Jamnagar (65.17); Patan(64.06); Porbandar (60.85);Anand (58.74); Gandhinagar(57.17); Rajkot (56.03);Mehsana (55.62); Navsari(55.53); Bharuch (54.19);Junagadh (53.96); Kachchh(50.83); Surat (50.07)19 districts

<50% - Amreli (47.86) 1 district

Gujarat 78.35 66.96(All households)

Source: Census of India, 2001 and 2011.

These observations have serious implications for ensuring equity in coverageas well as sustainability of sources. That the arid and semi-arid districts ofthe state (including those in Kachchh, Saurashtra and northern regions)continue to be affected by poor coverage by drinking water and sanitation

facilities raises questions about the efficacy of WASMO in undertaking thehuge responsibility for rural Gujarat. In fact, in a detailed study on slippagesin drinking water and sanitation status in rural Gujarat the unsustainabilityof water supply has been attributed to the following: “(1) tail end villagesare usually deprived of water supply, (2) for the other villages also the watersupply is frequently irregular and unreliable, (3) the adequacy of water isalso poor (less than 10 lpcd some times), and (4) the quality of water is notpotable either because of the problems with the source or because ofcontamination caused by leakage or breakage in the pipe line” (Hirway etal., 2010: 11).

16. Observations from the Field

In order to obtain an impression about the current status and functioningof the WASMO programme, a rather quick field survey was undertaken infour villages. These villages were chosen randomly from the four distinctregions of the state: V-1 (North) – from Banaskantha district; V-2 (South)- from Surat district; V-3 (Saurashtra) - from Porbandar district; and V-4(Kachchh) - from Kachchh district. Given the constraints of time andresources data were collected through a structured village level questionnaireand discussion with villagers. The respondents included a few members ofthe Pani Samitis, talati and/or sarpanch and other villagers.

The distribution of population and households are given in Table 9. Goingby the size of population and number of households these are relativelysmaller size villages excepting V-1 which is slightly larger than an averagevillage in Gujarat. The average household size is less than 5 in the samplevillages of Saurashtra and Kachchh. Further, the sample villages for V-2and V-3 have majority households belonging to the OBC. From Table 10one could obtain an idea regarding the existence of various public drinkingwater sources. It may be observed that all the sample villages have basicwater storage and distribution facilities as overhead tank, sumps and havedas(drinking water troughs for animals). It is interesting to note that in V-1 andV-3 almost all households have tap water connection; this is not the case,however, in the other two sample villages. Similarly, only V-2 has a fairlydeveloped water filter plant which has become a source of income forwater infrastructure maintenance in the village. Purified water is sold at Rs.0.85 per litre and all households consume this water. The remaining threesample villages do not have any such water filter plant. No rainwater

33

harvesting systems have been developed for community use by WASMOin any of the sample villages.

Table 9: Population and Households of the Surveyed Villages

Details V-1 (North) V-2 (South) V-3 (Saurashtra) V-4 (Kachchh)

Population 2308 719* 957* 1253

No. of Households 437 131 236 263

AverageHousehold Size 5.3 5.5 4.1 4.8

Source: Census of India, 2011.Note: *Predominantly belongs to Other Backward Castes (OBCs), including Suthar,

Vaghri, Valand, Darji, Koli Patel, Mer, Rabari and Bawaji.

Table 10: Drinking Water Sources for Community Use in the Surveyed Villages

Village/Source V-1 (North) V-2 (South) V-3 (Saurashtra) V-4 (Kachchh)

Regional RuralWater Supply - - 1 -

Overhead tank 1 1* 1 1

Underground tank(Sump) 1 1 1 1

Handpump 4 2 - -

Standpost 5 1* 5**

Tubewell /Borewell 1 1 - 1

Well - 1 - 1

Rainwaterharvesting structure - Pond - -

Drinking watertrough (haveda) foranimals 3 1 3 1

Tap Connection 250 - 200 -

Filter plant linked topipeline (WASMO) - 1 - -

Source: Field Survey.Note: * Non-functional ** Out of five four are non-functional.

34

A few questions were asked to have an idea about the manner in which theWASMO scheme was implemented in the sample villages. Table 11indicates that people’s contribution of 10 per cent of the total cost of thescheme had been collected in all the four villages. However, excepting forV-4, there were no uniform contribution amount (10 per cent of the totalproject cost divided by the number of households) was collected. Forinstance, in V-1 and V-2 the household contribution ranged as much betweenRs. 500-5000 and Rs. 100-11000. This has been an issue usually discussedin connection with ensuring ‘popular/community participation’ in Swajaldharaprogrammes. Often a few dominant residents of the village insist on payinga larger share to convey the impression of those being better-off householdsand would not encourage households with lower income and/or social statusto claim ‘equal’ participation in the water projects. By ignoring this aspectof discrimination (but making sure that 10 per cent of the total cost iscollected from the villages) the WASMO programme has undermined thespirit and efficiency of community participation.

Provision of the kit for checking water quality at the village level was animportant component of the drinking water supply programme; the localvillagers were to be trained to use the contraption to keep a close vigil ifthe quality of drinking water was deteriorating. As Table 11 shows, in V-1 no such kit was given and in V-2 no quality checking had been conductedat all. Another look at the data suggests that the WASMO enthusiasmmight have waned following the early years’ activity. This is due to the factthat in V-1 and V-2 the Pani Samitis were formed during 2010-11.

35

Table 11: Implementation of WASMO Schemes

Village/Activity V-1 (North) V-2 (South) V-3 (Saurashtra) V-4 (Kachchh)

Total cost of thescheme (in Rs. lakh) 15.00 11.50 12.00 10.00

People’s contribution(in Rs. lakh) 1.50 1.20 1.20 1.00

Range of contributionper household (in Rs.) 500-5000 100-11000 500-2000 450 each(appx.)

People’s contributionin kind, includinglabour (No. ofhouseholds) 5 20 - 25

Village/Activity V-1 (North) V-2 (South) V-3 (Saurashtra) V-4 (Kachchh)

Year in which kit forquality checkprovided — 2011 2007 2003

Frequency ofquality checkingduring last 2 years — — 10-12 times 7-8 times

Source: Field Survey.

In carrying out the processes to initiate the programme at the village level,it was reported that WASMO personnel had visited the villages and explainedthe issue about people’s contribution to the project as a mark of communityownership. However, respondents, excepting in V-2 did not recollect muchabout awareness programmes and if meetings including Gram Sabhas wereheld to consult the villagers regarding the action plan, community supervision,replacing old pipelines or installation of filter plants.

Pani Samitis have been described as the key local level institutions thatfacilitate smooth management of the water supply and distribution by thecommunity representatives. Table 12 on the working of Pani Samitissuggests that in V-1 and V-2 the members hardly met. These are again quitedifferent from V-3 and V-4 where Pani Samitis, formed during the earlyphases of WASMO, have been meeting a few times a year. Pani Samitishave, nevertheless, been generally managing various components of thewater supply infrastructure as shown in Table 13.

36

Table 12: Working of Pani Samitis

Village Year of Frequency of Membership ProfileFormation Meetings* Total Caste Sex

V-1 (North)** 2010-11 No information 8 SC-1 Male-6OBC-7 Female-2

V-2 (South) 2010-11 1 9 ST-1 Male-7OBC-8 Female-2

V-3 (Saurashtra) 2004-05 2-3 7 No records available

V-4 (Kachchh) 2003-04 5-6 7 SC-1 Male-4

General-6 Female-3

Source: Field Survey.Notes: * Annual average ** The new Pani Samiti was yet to be formalized.

Table 13: Management of Water Supply Structures

Village Structure Management

V-1 (North) Overhead tank, Pipeline Pani Samiti-Sarpanch

V-2 (South) Filter plant, Pipeline, Standpost-5 Pani Samiti

V-3 (Saurashtra) Overhead tank, Underground tank Pani Samiti

(Sump), Pipeline, Standpost,Pump house, Haveda

V-4 (Kachchh) Underground tank (Sump), Gram PanchayatWater harvesting structure

Source: Field Survey.

An additional activity of WASMO involves provision of drinking waterand sanitation facilities at the village schools. As may be seen from Table14, adequate and timely availability of water through tubewells/borewellsat the school premises has been an important facility for children studyinghere. It was impressive that schools in all the sample villages have separatetoilets for boys and girls. These toilets also have tap connection for water.The roof water harvesting structures, albeit, were absent in V-1 and V-2pointing to the lapse by WASMO.

37

Table 14: Water Supply Provision by WASMO at Village Schools

Village V-1 (North) V-2 (South) V-3 (Saurashtra) V-4 (Kachchh)

School (Standards 1 (I-V) 1 (I-V) 1 (I-VIII) 1 (I-VIII)taught) 1 (VI-VIII)

Handpump 1 - - -

Tubewell/Borewell 2 1 (with 1 (with sump) 1 (connected(connected RO plant) to tank fittedto tank) with water

filter device)

Adequate and timely Yes Yes Yes Yesavailability of water

Boys toilets 1 1 1 2*

Girls toilets 1 1 1 2

Roof water harvesting — — Functional Functionalstructure

Note: * One toilet does not have tap water connection.

Views regarding the performance and approachability of WASMO inmanaging the water supply structures have been summarized in Table 15.As may be obvious from the responses, the Pani Samitis have beenundertaking operation and maintenance activities; they consult WASMO,if necessary. While the role of WASMO during the formative years hasbeen acknowledged as satisfactory, the attention and support have declinedover the years.

38

Table 15: Functioning and Monitoring of WASMO Activities/Facilities

Village/ Managing Difficulty Visits to Monitor Opinion onMechanism WASMO Activities/ WASMO’s

Facilities Performance

V-1 Villagers manage WASMO personnel Installing pipeline(North) themselves had come last year in for the village was

overseeing documents helpfulMotor withApproached WASMO of Pani Samiti higher HP requiredfor motor problem,but they would do itafter 5 years

Concerned overdecreasinggroundwater level

V-2 Pani Samiti solves WASMO personnel WASMO’s work is(South) most problems from Surat office visit satisfactory

at times

V-3 Pani Samiti solves WASMO personnel Easy access to(Saurashtra) most problems rarely visits water after

WASMO’sIn cases, approach interventionWASMO contributed to

overalldevelopment ofthe village

V-4 Pani Samiti solves Unlike earlier phases, Old tank has been(Kachchh) most problems no one from WASMO defunct since 1985,

WASMO also helps. comes these days but WASMO notkeen to build anew one.

17. Issues in Governance Deficit

Instances of impropriety in governance attributed to WASMO have beenbrought to light through the national media. A recent report9 has beenindicative of lapses in managing the programme:

The country’s apex auditor has found that Gujarat’s key water supply agency

39

9 http://www.indianexpress.com/news/key-water-supply-agency-wasmo-pulled-up/930847/

lacks the ability to mobilise the public, dug wells to benefit private farmers(which is not allowed), and left four-fifth of its expenditure unaudited. TheComptroller and Auditor General’s audit of Water and SanitationManagement Organisation (WASMO) says, “The state government couldachieve water distribution schemes in 7932 (44 %) villages by 2010. Inviolation of guidelines, wells were dug in private land benefiting the privateland owners, who used these wells for irrigation purpose.” WASMO dropped276 villages from water supply schemes for want of social mobilisation, theCAG notes, adding there were delays ranging from 18 to 45 months inrendering services of social mobilisation, capacity development, etc. by theimplementation support agencies. “Testing of water by field Test Kits andfeed back to affected villages, etc., had not achieved desired results...Operation and Maintenance Fund meant for Swajaldhara was paid to GujaratWater Supply and Sewerage Board by Government of Gujarat,” it said,highlighting the diversion of finances.

Similar reports suggesting irresponsibility on the part of WASMO in allowingwater pollution to rise in villages around the industrial belts of south Gujarat,namely, Vapi, Ankleswar and Nandesari. As the report10 observes:”About32% of the state’s drinking water sources were found to be “contaminated”in a premonsoon survey, but affected villagers were not alerted, claimedCAG. Though there were “alternate sources of safe drinking water” in4215 villages, the top state body, Water and Sanitation ManagementOrganisation (WASMO), remained indifferent and did not alert the villagers.The report blamed the lackadaisical attitude of the state government,including agencies like Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB), for ignoringeffects of pollution on human health.”

18. Concluding Observations

It is important to observe that since almost over a decade now, relevant andcomprehensive official statistics on various aspects of drinking water andsanitation have become unavailable or not easily available. This is quite incontrast to the situation prevailing earlier. These relate to reliable data onhabitations classified as Fully Covered (FC), Partially Covered (PC) andNot Covered (NC) as much as those concerning villages or habitations

10 http://articles.timesof india.indiat imes.com/2012-04-02/ahmedabad/31274402_1_cag-report-water-pollution-gpcb

40

afflicted with chemical and other contamination as excess fluoride, excessnitrate, and excess salinity, etc. Similarly, it has been a daunting task toaccess official information on implementation of various schemes likeregional or group schemes, individual schemes, Narmada based pipelinescheme and so on. For instance, the evaluation study on WASMO’s ERRwas not available for scholarly reference.11 The absence of and inaccessibilityto such documents on this vital sector has restricted meaningful analysisand course correction as would have been required. The conspicuous absenceof independent, systematic and comprehensive evaluation of WASMOinterventions, thus, remains a serious roadblock in evaluating the nature andextent of achievement of this heavily-publicised SPV in the sector.

Moreover, there is hardly any data available on regularity, adequacy andquality of drinking water by habitation and by season. Little is knownabout if socially marginalised communities (SCs, STs, OBCs and religiousminorities) have been sidelined under these schemes. Further, we have noinformation about the dynamics of functioning of Pani Samitis as differentfrom their formation. For instance, with the completion of the term of aPani Samiti within the stipulated two-year period the following new PaniSamiti often have members with conflicting interests or lack necessarysupport from their predecessors. Concern has been expressed regarding thecentralising tendency of the WASMO hierarchy and weakening ofparticipation of community based organisations. Staff shortage and highattrition have implied that effective governance, including responding tovillage level needs in the sector, has been compromised. The eventualentry of the corporate entities in this ‘community managed’ programmehas now been possible with companies offering to pay the popularcontribution on behalf of the villagers/users through the CSR route tocomply with the requirement under the new dispensation of the CompaniesAct. Above all, gross neglect of rural sanitation has continued to remain asplodge on the records of WASMO.

As over a decade has passed since its inception, WASMO as an approachneeds to be thought through and evidence assessed rigorously in the interestof the community.

41

11 Referred to as ‘Rapid Assessment Study by GIDR 2007’ in Sama et al. (2008: 132)

References

Chatterjee, Ashoke (Ed.) (2000), Gujarat Jal-Disha 2010: A Vision of a Healthy andEquitable Future with Drinking Water, Hygiene and Sanitation for All, Gujarat StateDrinking Water Infrastructure Co. Ltd., Gandhinagar.

Das, Keshab (2004), Sector Reform Project for Drinking water and Sanitation in RuralGujarat: A Compilation of Reports for the Pilot Districts (Mehsana, Rajkot and Surat),Gujarat Institute of Development Research, Ahmedabad. (Mimeo, unpublished).

Das, Keshab (2005), Alternative Strategies for Rural Drinking Water Supply in Gujarat:Practices, Institutions and Policy Learning, Gujarat Institute of Development Research,Ahmedabad. (Mimeo, unpublished).

Das, Keshab (2009), ‘Village Water Tanks in Gujarat’s Desert Region: Potential andRelevance’, International Journal of Rural Management, 5 (2), pp. 129-144.

Das, Keshab (2013), ‘Drinking Water and Sanitation in Gujarat: Crisis and Response’,in GIDR (ed.), Gujarat’s Development by the Mid 2000s: A Compendium, at http://www.gidr.ac.in/files/pdf/Chapter%2016.pdf

Das, Keshab and B. L. Kumar (1999), ‘Augmenting Drinking Water Supply: Evidencefrom Rural Gujarat’, in Abha Lakshmi Singh (Ed.), Resource Management, B.R. PublishingCorporation, Delhi.

Government of Gujarat (2013), Socio-economic Review 2012-13, Gujarat State, Directorateof Economics and Statistics, Gandhinagar.

Gupte, P. R. (2009), ‘Issues of Groundwater Governance and Policy Instruments in theGujarat State, India’, at http://www.researchgate.net/publication/233992546_JIC-Sept09-4520-G4-Gupte

Hirway, Indira and Subhrangsu Goswami (2008), ‘Dynamics of Crisis in DrinkingWater in Coastal Gujarat with Special Reference to Saurashtra Coast’, Working PaperNo. 39, Centre for Development Alternatives, Ahmedabad.

Hirway, Indira, Shital Lodhia, Alka Palrecha and Sanjay Rode (2009), ‘Status ofSalinity and its Impact on Livelihood in Coastal India: An Exploratory Exercise’,Working Paper No. 41, Centre for Development Alternatives, Ahmedabad.

Indu, Rajnarayan and Sunderrajan Krishnan (2007), ‘Groundwater Contamination andRural Water Treatment in Gujarat: Safe Drinking Water for the Last Person?’, Paperpresented at the Conference on Gujarat: Water Resources Management for a BetterTomorrow, Ahmedabad, January 12-13.

42

Institute of Rural Management Anand (IRMA) (2001), White Paper and Water in Gujarat,IRMA, Anand.

Kumar, M. Dinesh, A. Narayanamoorthy, O.P. Singh, M.V.K. Sivamohan, ManojSharma and Nitin Bassi (2010), ‘Gujarat’s Agricultural Growth Story: Exploding SomeMyths’, Occasional Paper No. 2-0410, Institute for Resource Analysis and Policy,Hyderabad.

PRAVAH (2005), ‘Swajaldhara: A Study on the Principles and Process towards PolicyAdvocacy’, Working Paper 1, PRAVAH, Ahmedabad.

Sama, R. K., I. K. Chhabra, Madhavi Purohit and Kosha Thaker (2008), Five Years ofDecentralised Community Managed Water Supply Programme, WASMO, Gandhinagar.

Sen, Susanto (2010), ‘Rational Water Management: Aligning the Interests ofStakeholders’, Gujarat Infrastructure, April-June, pp. 22-23.

United Nations World Water Assessment Programme (UNWWAP) (2014), The UnitedNations World Water Development Report 2014: Water and Energy, UNESCO, Paris.

43

THE GIDR WORKING PAPER SERIES (No. 171 onwards)

171*. Keshab Das, “Micro and Small Enterprises during Reforms: Policy andConcerns”, July 2006. Rs. 25.

172*. Keshab Das, “Electricity and Rural Development Linkage”, August 2006.Rs. 30.

173*. Keshab Das, “Traditional Water Harvesting for Domestic Use:Potential and Relevance of Village Tanks in Gujarat’s Desert Region”,November 2006. Rs. 30.

174*. Samira Guennif and N. Lalitha, “TRIPS Plus Agreements and Issues inAccess to Medicines in Developing Countries”, May 2007. Rs. 30.

175*. N. Lalitha, “Government Intervention and Prices of Medicines: Lessons fromTamil Nadu”, July 2007. Rs. 30.

176*. Amita Shah and Jignasu Yagnik, “Estimates of BPL-households in RuralGujarat: Measurement, Spatial Pattern and Policy Imperatives”, August 2007.Rs. 35.

177*. P.K. Viswanathan, “Critical Issues Facing China’s Rubber Industry in theEra of Economic Integration: An Analysis in Retrospect and Prospect”,September 2007. Rs. 35.

178. Rudra Narayan Mishra, “Nutritional Deprivation among IndianPre-school Children: Does Rural-Urban Disparity Matter?”, October 2007.Rs. 35.

179*. Amita Shah, “Patterns, Processes of Reproduction, and Policy Imperatives forPoverty in Remote Rural Areas: A Case Study of Southern Orissa in India”,November 2007. Rs. 40.

180*. N. Lalitha and Samira Guennif, “A Status Paper on the Pharmaceutical Industryin France”, December 2007. Rs. 30.

181*. Keshab Das, “Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises in India: Unfair Fare”,January 2008. Rs. 40.

182*. Bharat Ramaswami, Carl E. Pray and N. Lalitha, “The Limits of IntellectualProperty Rights: Lessons from the Spread of Illegal Transgenic Cotton Seedsin India”, February 2008. Rs. 45.

44

183*. Keshab Das, “Drinking Water and Sanitation in Rural Madhya Pradesh:Recent Initiatives and Issues”, April 2008. Rs. 40.

184*. N. Lalitha, “Doha Declaration and Compulsory License for Access toMedicines”, June 2008. Rs. 40.

185*. Keshab Das and Aswini Kumar Mishra, “Horizontal Equity and the ThirteenthFinance Commission: Issues and Ponderables”, July 2008. Rs. 35.

186*. Jeemol Unni, “Are Gender Differentials in Educational Capabilities Mediatedthrough Institutions of Caste and Religion in India?”, September 2008. Rs. 40.

187*. Amita Shah and Sajitha O.G., “Poverty and Livelihood among Tribals inGujarat: Status, Opportunities, and Strategies”, October 2008. Rs. 45.

188*. S. Visalakshi, “Role of Critical Infrastructure and incentives in theCommercialisation of Biotechnology in India: An Analysis”, November 2008.Rs. 40.

189. P.K. Viswanathan, “Co-operatives and Collective Action: Case of a RubberGrower Co-operative in East Garo Hills in Meghalaya, North East India”,December 2008. Rs. 40.

190*. Suma Scaria, “Looking Beyond Literacy: Disparities in Levels of and Accessto Education in a Kerala Village”, January 2009. Rs. 35.

191. Keshab Das, “Agency and Access under Decentralised Governance: WaterSupply and Sanitation in Kolkata City”, February 2009. Rs. 35.

192. Shiddalingaswami Hanagodimath, “Economic Reforms and Expenditure onHealth in India”, March 2009. Rs. 35.

193. Amita Shah and Sunny Jose, “Asset Creation and Local Economy underNREGS: Scope and Challenges”, April 2009. Rs. 40.

194*. Jeemol Unni and Suma Scaria, “Governance Structure and Labour MarketOutcomes in Garment Embellishment Chains”, July 2009. Rs. 35.

195. Tara S. Nair, Jan Postmus and Rachayeeta Pradhan, “Social Responsibility ofIndian Microfinance: A Critical Review”, December 2009. Rs. 35.

196. Jharna Pathak, “Does the Method of System of Rice Intensification (SRI)Outperform Conventional System? A Case Study of Gujarat”, January 2010.Rs. 35.

45

46

197*. Keshab Das and K.J. Joseph, “On Learning, Innovation and CompetenceBuilding in India’s SMEs: Challenges Ahead”, February 2010. Rs. 45.

198*. N. Lalitha and P.K. Viswanathan, “Pesticide Applications in Bt Cotton Farms:Issues Relating to Environment and Non-Tariff Barriers”, March 2010. Rs. 35.

199*. Cassandra Sweet and Keshab Das, “Institutional and Procedural Challenges toGeneric Production in India: Antiretrovirals in Focus”, October 2010. Rs. 35.

200. Itishree Pattnaik, “Analysis of Agricultural Performance in AndhraPradesh and Orissa: 1960-61 to 2005-06”, March 2011. Rs. 35.

201. Rudra N. Mishra and Udaya S. Mishra, “Assessing Characteristic Differentialin Dichotomous Outcomes: A Case of Child Undernourishment”, April 2011.Rs. 35.

202. P.K. Viswanathan, “Will Neoliberal Policies Resolve Water SectorDilemmas? Learnings from Maharashtra and Gujarat”, May 2011. Rs. 45.

203. Jharna Pathak, “Agroforestry in Tribal Areas of Gujarat: Move towardsSustainable Agriculture?”, June 2011. Rs. 45.

204*. Madhusudan Bandi, “The Telangana Turmoil: Apprehensions and Hope”,August 2011. Rs. 30.

205. Tara S. Nair, “Two Decades of Indian Microfinance: Trajectory andTransformation”, September 2011. Rs. 40.

206. Biplab Dhak and Amita Shah, “International Migration from Gujarat: AnExploratory Analysis”, September 2011, Rs. 35.

207* Anil Gumber, Biplab Dhak and N. Lalitha, “Declining Free Healthcare andRising Treatment Costs in India: Analysis of National Sample Surveys,1986-2004”, October 2011, Rs. 40

208 Tara S. Nair, “Power to Women through Financial Services: Revisiting theMicrofinance Promise”, November 2011, Rs. 30.

209 N. Lalitha, “Protecting IPRs of Siddha Practitioners through People’sBiodiversity Register”, December 2011, Rs. 35.

210* Amita Shah, Dipak Nandani and Hasmukh Joshi, “Marginalisation orMainstreaming? Evidence from Special Economic Zones in Gujarat”,July 2012, Rs. 45.

211* P.K. Viswanathan, “Rationalisation of Agriculture in Kerala and its Implicationsfor Natural Environment, Agro-Ecosystems and Livelihoods”, September2012, Rs.40. (IP)

212 Keshab Das, “Situating Labour in the Global Production Network Debate:As if the ‘South’ Mattered”, December 2012, Rs. 40.

213 Jaya Prakash Pradhan and Keshab Das, “Determinants of Regional Patternsof Manufacturing Exports: Indian Firms since the Mid-1990s”, January 2013,Rs. 40.

214 Madhusudan Bandi, “A Review of Decentralisation in India with ParticularReference to PRIs in Gujarat”, February 2013, Rs. 30

215 Madhusudan Bandi, “Samras in the Context of Gujarat Gram Panchayats: AThreat to the Idea of Democracy?”, March 2013, Rs. 30

216* P.K. Viswanathan and Amita Shah, “Has Indian Plantation Sector Weatheredthe Crisis ? A Critical Assessment of Tea Plantation Industry in the Post-reforms Context”, April 2013, Rs. 40.

217 Keshab Das, “Developing Regional Value Chains in South Asian LeatherClusters: Issues, Options and an Indian Case”, May 2013, Rs. 45.

218. Chandra Sekhar Bahinipati, “Determinants of Farm-Level Adaptation Diversityto Cyclone and Flood: Insights from a Farm Household-Level Survey inEastern India’, August 2013, Rs. 40.

219. Chandra Sekhar Bahinipati and L. Venkatachalam, “Determinants of Farmlevel Adaptation Practices to Climate Extremes: A Case Study from Odisha,India”, December 2013, Rs. 40.

220*. Tara S. Nair, Milind Sathye, Muni Perumal, Craig Applegate and SuneetaSathye, “Regulating Microfinance through Codes of Conduct: A Critical Reviewof the Indian Experience”, March 2014, Rs. 45.

* Also published elsewhere IP In print OS Out of stock

47